Motion to suppress confession or admission

22-3215. Motion to suppress confession or admission. (1) Prior to the preliminary examination or trial a defendant may move to suppress as evidence any confession or admission given by him on the ground that it is not admissible as evidence. (2) The motion shall be in writing and shall allege the grounds upon which it is claimed that the confession or admission is not admissible as evidence. (3) If the motion alleges grounds which, if proved, would show the confession or admission not to be admissible the court shall conduct a hearing into the merits of the motion. (4) The burden of proving that a confession or admission is admissible shall be on the prosecution. (5) The issue of the admissibility of the confession or admission shall not be submitted to the jury. The circumstances surrounding the making of the confession or admission may be submitted to the jury as bearing upon the credibility or the weight to be given to the confession or admission. (6) The motion shall be made before preliminary examination or trial, unless opportunity therefor did not exist or the defendant was not aware of the ground for the motion, but the court in its discretion may entertain the motion at the preliminary examination or the trial. History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3215; July 1. Law Review and Bar Journal References: Apparent intention of act is that an order to suppress be made by either the magistrate conducting the preliminary hearing, or the trial judge, Richard H. Seaton and Paul E. Wilson, 39 J.B.A.K. 167 (1970). Constitutionality of the use of lay judges in Kansas, 25 K.L.R. 275, 282 (1977). "Survey of Kansas Law: Criminal Law and Procedure," Keith G. Meyer, 27 K.L.R. 391, 418 (1979). "An Honest Confession is Good for the State," Roger W. Badeker, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 20, 21, 23 (1993). "Constitutional Law: Everything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You in a Court of Law...or Will It? [State v. Rakestraw, 871 P.2d 1274 (Kan. 1994)]," Thomas J. Parascandola, 34 W.L.J. 174, 181 (1994). CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Burden on prosecution to prove confession or admission admissible; district court erred in ordering suppression of testimony concerning defendant's oral admission. State v. Voit, 207 Kan. 635, 639, 485 P.2d 1306. 2. Cited in appeal on questions reserved; functions of court and jury discussed in disapproving patterned jury instruction. State v. McClanahan, 212 Kan. 208, 211, 510 P.2d 153. 3. Testimony of agents at interview where confession obtained competent and substantial sufficiently justifying trial court in admitting confession. State v. McVeigh, 213 Kan. 432, 436, 516 P.2d 918. 4. Conviction of burglary; extrajudicial statements supported by evidence. State v. Law, 214 Kan. 643, 650, 522 P.2d 320. 5. Trial court determination by preliminary investigation that extrajudicial statement was freely given sustained on appeal. State v. Smith, 216 Kan. 265, 267, 530 P.2d 1215. 6. Testimony of informer concerning information surreptitiously obtained admitted after hearing; reversible error. State v. McCorgary, 218 Kan. 350, 359, 543 P.2d 952. 7. Court's conclusion that confession was voluntarily given and admissible upheld. State v. Goodseal, 220 Kan. 487, 499, 553 P.2d 279. 8. Substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that confession was voluntarily given. State v. Harwick, 220 Kan. 572, 575, 577, 552 P.2d 987. 9. Applied; confession properly admitted after pre-trial hearing; conviction of crimes affirmed. State v. Kanive, 221 Kan. 34, 35, 558 P.2d 1075. 10. Preliminary inquiry determining extrajudicial statement admissible; supported by substantial competent evidence. State v. Thompson, 221 Kan. 165, 169, 558 P.2d 93. 11. Applied; discrepancies in facts not bearing on voluntariness or relating to credibility of witness irrelevant to inquiry hereunder. State v. Duncan, 221 Kan. 714, 720, 721, 722, 562 P.2d 84. 12. Motion to suppress statement properly sustained where finding it was not intelligently or voluntarily given. State v. Roberts, 223 Kan. 49, 56, 574 P.2d 164. 13. Order overruling motion to suppress upheld; arrest not illegal. State v. Buckner, 223 Kan. 138, 141, 574 P.2d 918. 14. Defendant's statements to police found by trial court to be voluntarily made; supported by evidence. State v. Gilder, 223 Kan. 220, 227, 574 P.2d 196. 15. Elements of information necessary to establish probable cause must be considered together. State v. Coe, 223 Kan. 153, 160, 574 P.2d 929. 16. Applied; sufficient evidence to establish voluntariness and justify admission of taped confession. State v. Treadwell, 223 Kan. 577, 578, 575 P.2d 550. 17. Rules for determining admissibility of confessions reviewed and applied; voluntariness, effect of alcohol, drugs, promises solicited by defendant. State v. Baker, 4 Kan. App. 2d 340, 342, 606 P.2d 120. 18. Trial court order excluding "other crimes" evidence not an order suppressing evidence; appellate court has no jurisdiction to hear appeal by state. State v. Boling, 5 Kan. App. 2d 371, 374, 375, 377, 617 P.2d 102. 19. Suppression of voluntary statements upheld where detainment found illegal. State v. Parks, 5 Kan. App. 2d 644, 645, 623 P.2d 516. 20. No factual basis to support claim cellmate placed there as informant. State v. Rouse, 229 Kan. 600, 606, 629 P.2d 167 (1981). 21. Court may close pretrial hearing and seal record if necessary to insure fair trial. Kansas City Star Co. v. Fossey, 230 Kan. 240, 245, 630 P.2d 1176 (1981). 22. Pretrial order suppressing admission of extrajudicial statement of defendant affirmed; state failed to sustain burden of proving admissibility. State v. Goering, 8 Kan. App. 2d 338, 656 P.2d 790 (1983). 23. Policemen's statements were not voluntary when refusal to answer would result in departmental discipline. State v. Mzhickteno, 8 Kan. App. 2d 389, 390, 392, 658 P.2d 1052 (1983). 24. Defendant entitled to have issue of voluntariness of confession tested by motion hereunder or by a "Jackson v. Denno-type hearing" but not by both. State v. Miles, 233 Kan. 286, 288, 289, 295, 662 P.2d 1227 (1983). 25. Cited in holding review under K.S.A. 22-3603 permitted where rulings may substantially impair state's ability to prosecute case. State v. Newman, 235 Kan. 29, 31, 35, 680 P.2d 257 (1984). 26. Where court upon oral motions to suppress evidence, dismissed charges prior to preliminary hearing the state must appeal dismissal to invoke appellate jurisdiction. State v. Patrzykont, 235 Kan. 537, 680 P.2d 555 (1984). 27. Motion to suppress statements of defendant on basis of mental status considered. State v. Boan, 235 Kan. 800, 803, 804, 686 P.2d 160 (1984). 28. When ruling made upon voluntariness of confession at Jackson v. Denno hearing, accused not entitled to resubmit issue to jury. State v. Mason, 238 Kan. 129, 133, 708 P.2d 963 (1985). 29. Burden is on state to justify warrantless arrest and admissibility of confession when challenged. State v. Strauch, 239 Kan. 203, 208, 718 P.2d 613 (1986). 30. Totality of circumstances examined in determining voluntariness of statements. State v. White, 246 Kan. 28, 32, 785 P.2d 950 (1990). 31. K.S.A. 22-3603 as proper statute to appeal order suppressing or excluding evidence that substantially impairs state's case examined. State v. Griffin, 246 Kan. 320, 323, 787 P.2d 701 (1990). 32. State's burden to prove confession admissible carries right to interlocutory appeal (K.S.A. 22-3603) on its suppression. State v. Weis, 246 Kan. 694, 696, 792 P.2d 989 (1990). 33. Although state has burden of proving confession is admissible, state has no burden to prove defendant does not meet McNaughton test. State v. William, 248 Kan. 389, 408, 807 P.2d 1292 (1991). 34. Timing of hearing and alleged involuntary nature of extrajudicial statements examined. State v. Clemons, 251 Kan. 473, 477, 836 P.2d 1147 (1992). 35. Alleged involuntary nature of confession examined and found voluntary. State v. Crawford, 253 Kan. 629, 644, 861 P.2d 791 (1993). 36. Whether alleged mental illness rendered defendant's confession involuntary examined. State v. Mack, 255 Kan. 21, 32, 871 P.2d 1265 (1994). 37. Whether defendant's incriminating statements were freely, voluntarily and intelligently given examined. State v. Lumbrera, 257 Kan. 144, 160, 891 P.2d 1096 (1995). 38. Trial court did not err in admitting defendant's statements after defendant had waived previously asserted right to counsel. State v. Straughter, 261 Kan. 481, 494, 932 P.2d 387 (1997). 39. Trial court challenge to admission of defendant's confession based on police coercion not properly preserved for appeal. State v. Cellier, 263 Kan. 54, 64, 948 P.2d 616 (1997). 40. Objective standard is used to determine whether interrogation is custodial or whether Miranda warning is required. State v. Deal, 271 Kan. 483, 23 P.3d 840 (2001). 41. Kansas procedure requires confession be challenged prior to or during trial or not at all. State v. Stevens, 285 Kan. 307, 326, 327, 172 P.3d 570 (2007). Previous | Next LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL General Policies 2026 Archived LCC Documents Archived LCC Meetings REVISOR OF STATUTES Archived Session Documents Archived School Finance Documents USEFUL LINKS Session Laws Kansas Administrative Regulations OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES Kansas Legislature Administrative Services Division of Post Audit Research Department Contact Us PDF Help www.ksrevisor.gov 2026